As is widely recognized, the Syrian civil war originated from the aspirations of the Syrian people for an improved quality of life, a stronger economy and the opportunity to live freely within a democratic framework.

Initially, the United States aimed to facilitate a regime change in Syria and establish a democratic order. The "Friends of Syria" platform, comprising approximately 60 members, included Türkiye as an active participant. In the course of events, the U.S. abandoned the objective of regime change in Syria, influenced by factors such as the assassination of the U.S. ambassador in Libya and the steadfast opposition from Iran and Russia.

When the U.S. abandoned the objective of regime change, it diverged from Türkiye’s approach. Subsequently, Syria became a focal point for various actors, including Iran, Russia, the U.S., Türkiye and numerous terrorist organizations.

On one hand, Syria, despite the backing of Iran and Russia, effectively lost its status as a functioning state. On the other hand, its territory has become a battleground for wars of influence between competing powers.

Under the guidance of the Republic of Türkiye, the Syrian National Army (SNA) and the interim Syrian government were established, particularly along the border with Türkiye. These groups began to pin their hopes on the Geneva and Astana formats to shape Syria’s future.

On the other hand, a group with ties to al-Qaida in the past, which later became the Nusra Front, and which actually consists of thousands of sub-groups and calls itself Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), was also present in the Idlib region.

Democracy in chaos

Initially, the SNA and the interim Syrian government comprised individuals who developed a state-oriented mindset with Türkiye's support and gradually evolved into a cohesive regional administrative entity.

One of the most prominent discussion topics in the past week has been the democratic progress and maturity of the opposition structures in Idlib.

In contrast, Iran's steadfast involvement is exemplified by the high motivation of its Shiite militias. These militias have often demonstrated behavior far from just or fair, along with Hezbollah members, who have occupied cities with the backing of Iran and Russia.

Moreover, the region has witnessed the emergence of parallel extremist threats. In fact, Iran has produced radicalism that is a mirror image of Deash on the other front, which was created by the U.S. Consequently, Syrian society has been confronted with violent organizations like the terrorist group the PKK, but also with the scourge of Deash and its exact ideological counterpart, Hezbollah and Shiite militias.

Coexisting in peace

The opposition groups that recently captured Aleppo and advanced toward Hama have adopted a noteworthy and distinctive approach. Upon entering Aleppo, they made deliberate efforts to engage with Christian neighborhoods, offering reassurances that no undemocratic practices would be practiced. They emphasized that Christians, Muslims, Armenians, Arabs, Turks and all other communities would coexist peacefully as residents of Aleppo.

Furthermore, these groups have pledged not to impose military rule over the city but to transfer its governance to the interim Syrian government. In addition, they articulated their intent to establish a local administration composed of Aleppo’s residents to address and manage the community’s needs and aspirations effectively.

The expectation for such groups operating on the Syrian ground was that they would act with greater vengeance, severity and a retaliatory mindset. However, during this process, whether due to the role of Türkiye as a mediator in the region, collaboration with Arab countries or the involvement of some mission leaders in Qatar, the reality has been quite different.

The Syrian opposition, mainly the SNA and the HTS, has demonstrated a grade of maturity, democratic principles and moral integrity that indicates a capacity to govern Syria in the future.

Meanwhile, Russia, already in a vulnerable position due to the ongoing Ukrainian-Russian war, is keen to avoid any unforeseen complications in Syria.

Iran, facing its own challenges with Israel, has experienced a regional setback as Hezbollah forces have predominantly returned to Lebanon, diminishing its influence on the ground.

From the perspective of Türkiye, its primary concern in the Syrian civil war remains the presence of terrorist groups in the region, particularly the PKK. Given the PKK's history of violent and terrorist acts targeting Türkiye directly, its presence is categorically unacceptable. At the same time, Türkiye remains committed to advancing the Geneva process and seeks meaningful progress towards a political resolution.

Refusing extended hand

As for the Assad regime, it has declined President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan's overtures for reconciliation, likely influenced by the short-term and reactive policy recommendations of Iran. Moreover, the Assad regime has engaged in prolonged stalling tactics, delaying the implementation of both the Geneva and Astana processes for the past seven to eight years.

The Republic of Türkiye, with its vision centered on a political solution and the success of the Geneva process, is closely monitoring the situation. However, it remains cautious, refraining from taking hasty actions as it seeks a balanced and strategic approach.

The shifting global context remains uncertain, yet it is evident that Türkiye has consistently upheld a principled stance in support of Syria's territorial integrity and its long-term transformation into a democratic, unitary state, far from any ambitions of occupation. Thanks to Türkiye's ability to maintain a strong position in the region during these turbulent days in Syria, the evolving conditions and global conjuncture have directly propelled Türkiye into a stronger position, further solidifying its regional influence.